User talk:Harmil/Dungeons & Dragons deities

Core setting

I'm thinking...maybe Core setting deserves more than a sub-header under Greyhawk? Just thinking outloud, but from a real-world historical point of view I think it bears greater weight. In a similar vein I like that you start it out with initial pantheons; it seems to me that thinking is more encyclopedic over-all. I don't know all that much about the pantheons as they've shifted over editions, but I think that is a better fruit to pluck than the list of gods the article will become. --mordicai. 18:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lists deleted

Well, the other lists have been redirected to the settings' pages, which do not have such lists.

The lists themselves have been deleted.

"Notability" is not quantified sufficiently, to avoid subjective decision-making overruling greater public interest. AFDs are out of hand, in this respect.

What's worse than something notable having only a stub article? Having no article at all.

Search "Zorquan" (Forgotten Realms deity, pivotal role in the setting's Draconic Holy Wars, attested in at least two official publications). Would have been in the list of draconic deities, which now has been entirely deleted. (Not moved, not merged, just deleted. 🤦🤕)

Notability proscriptivists are the bane of Wikipedia. ProphetZarquon (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]